Using CNN Saliency Maps and EEG Modulation Spectra for Improved and More Interpretable Machine Learning‐Based Alzheimer’s Disease Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomarkers based on resting-state electroencephalography (EEG) signals have emerged as a promising tool in the study of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Recently, a state-of-the-art biomarker was found based on visual inspection of power modulation spectrograms where three "patches" or regions from the modulation spectrogram were proposed and used for AD diagnostics. Here, we propose the use of deep neural networks, in particular convolutional neural networks (CNNs) combined with saliency maps, trained on power modulation spectrogram inputs to find optimal patches in a data-driven manner. Experiments are conducted on EEG data collected from fifty-four participants, including 20 healthy controls, 19 patients with mild AD, and 15 moderate-to-severe AD patients. Five classification tasks are explored, including the three-class problem, early-stage detection (control vs. mild-AD), and severity level detection (mild vs. moderate-to-severe). Experimental results show the proposed biomarkers outperform the state-of-the-art benchmark across all five tasks, as well as finding complementary modulation spectrogram regions not previously seen via visual inspection. Lastly, experiments are conducted on the proposed biomarkers to test their sensitivity to age, as this is a known confound in AD characterization. Across all five tasks, none of the proposed biomarkers showed a significant relationship with age, thus further highlighting their usefulness for automated AD diagnostics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".